• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose

E

emperus

Diamond Member
Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) spoke twice last year with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Justice Department officials said, encounters he did not disclose when asked about possible contacts between members of President Trump’s campaign and representatives of Moscow during Sessions’s confirmation hearing to become attorney general.

One of the meetings was a private conversation between Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak that took place in September in the senator’s office, at the height of what U.S. intelligence officials say was a Russian cyber campaign to upend the U.S. presidential race.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...488419989396&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.2c7a1ae625dd

This is getting crazy. This has to assure a special prosecutor. And Session may have lied under oath.
 
Last edited:
Sessions added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”

Mhm...
 
K1052 said:
On the surface it looks like Sessions perjured himself in his confirmation hearing.
Click to expand...

The purpose of this leak is to force congress to install an independent investigator.

Each leak and article have a purpose in the process. Each major story has had a specific target. They will continue precision strikes until everything is set.
 
Jhhnn said:
Probably not unless he was officially a member of the campaign. You know, officially official.

See how that works?
Click to expand...

Not true, it doesn't matter if he was part of the campaign or not.

If he was asked "In the last year, did you communicate with Russia" and he said "No", that's perjury.

However, from what I've read, he was not asked that exact question and the question gave him a few outs.

Also, the point of this article has nothing to do with perjury, nor should anyone care about a theoretical perjury charge. It's about getting an independent investigator.
 
MikeMike said:
Not true, it doesn't matter if he was part of the campaign or not.

If he was asked "In the last year, did you communicate with Russia" and he said "No", that's perjury.

However, from what I've read, he was not asked that exact question and the question gave him a few outs.

Also, the point of this article has nothing to do with perjury, nor should anyone care about a theoretical perjury charge. It's about getting an independent investigator.
Click to expand...

I think it does matter if he was affiliated with the campaign because Franken's question, which is unfortunately paraphrased rather than directly quoted in the article, seems to make it relevant. And yet, it does look like Sessions lied.

At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.

“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”
Click to expand...

So the real question is, if these communications had nothing to do with the election, but were instead part of Session's job in the Armed Services Committee, why did he lie and say he had no communications?
 
Last edited:
Something else to keep an eye on. The WaPo article and CNN have written separate pieces on this, and there is one key fact that differs between the two. It looks like they spoke with different sources.

WaPo:

Current and former U.S. officials say they see Kislyak as a diplomat, not an intelligence operative. But they were not sure to what extent, if any, Kislyak was aware of or involved in the covert Russian election campaign.
Click to expand...

CNN:

Kislyak Is considered by US intelligence to be one of Russia's top spies and spy-recruiters in Washington, according to current and former senior US government officials.
Click to expand...

Very keen to know which of these statements is accurate.
 
Another no thing. Bet this goes nowhere. It's all gonna come down to the way the question was asked and the way the media will spin it. Legally this goes nowhere. Now, let's get that Trump/Russian connection investigation going, so we can get this over with, so we don't have to keep hearing about it everyday.
 
compuwiz1 said:
Another no thing. Bet this goes nowhere. It's all gonna come down to the way the question was asked and the way the media will spin it. Legally this goes nowhere. Now, let's get that Trump/Russian connection investigation going, so we can get this over with, so we don't have to keep hearing about it everyday.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with perjury, getting Sessions thrown out, etc.

It has everything to do with the first step towards what you are hoping for. Getting Sessions to step down and appoint an independent authority in his place.
 
compuwiz1 said:
Another no thing. Bet this goes nowhere. It's all gonna come down to the way the question was asked and the way the media will spin it. Legally this goes nowhere. Now, let's get that Trump/Russian connection investigation going, so we can get this over with, so we don't have to keep hearing about it everyday.
Click to expand...

Wait you don't think all these connections to Russia among Trumps staff are weird? Esp. when they lie about them to cover it up?
 
woolfe9998 said:
Something else to keep an eye on. The WaPo article and CNN have written separate pieces on this, and there is one key fact that differs between the two. It looks like they spoke with different sources.

WaPo:



CNN:



Very keen to know which of these statements is accurate.
Click to expand...

they actually can both be accurate depending on the classified access and knowledge of the sources.
 
emperus said:
Wait you don't think all these connections to Russia among Trumps staff are weird? Esp. when they lie about them to cover it up?
Click to expand...

That's why I'm in favor of an investigation, so we can get truth, vs opinions. Time for the weight of law to kick in. I'm good with it.
 
emperus said:
Sessions said he met with the Russian amb. at the height of the US belief that Russia was hacking the election. How could he forget that meeting?
Click to expand...

I don't believe the meeting in and of itself is illegal in anyway. The question is whether he did in fact perjury himself, or not.
 
compuwiz1 said:
I don't believe the meeting in and of itself is illegal in anyway. The question is whether he did in fact perjury himself, or not.
Click to expand...

No one who provided information for that article cares about perjury.

Again, there is zero care about perjury.

This is a specific attack to get an independent person appointed to oversee the investigation. aka, removing Sessions from having his hands on the investigation that may involve investigating himself.
 
compuwiz1 said:
That's why I'm in favor of an investigation, so we can get truth, vs opinions. Time for the weight of law to kick in. I'm good with it.
Click to expand...

We don't agree often but I will say on this you're a good man. I agree its time to have a real investigation and bring on an independent 3rd party to run it.
 
MikeMike said:
No one who provided information for that article cares about perjury.

Again, there is zero care about perjury.

This is a specific attack to get an independent person appointed to oversee the investigation. aka, removing Sessions from having his hands on the investigation that may involve investigating himself.
Click to expand...

I agree, it seems this goal is to make sure this Russian connection is pursued. I'm sure Sessions was contacted tonight for a comment that's why he released the statement. That tells me that the reporting is accurate and the leakers are legit.
 
Food for thought:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-later-did-not-disclose/ar-AAnH58Z?li=BBnb7Kz

In January, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Sessions for answers to written questions. “Several of the President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?” Leahy wrote.

Sessions responded with one word: “No.”

Justice officials said Sessions met with Kislyak on Sept. 8 in his capacity as a member of the armed services panel rather than in his role as a Trump campaign surrogate.

“He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee,” Flores said.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top